Watch out, ladies! And feminism! Because guys are totally onto you and your dirty periods. According to a study cited on the blog What Men Think of Women, men can tell when women are on their periods – just by listening to them talk! Well, some of the time, anyway. From a writeup of the research in the Times of India:
Men can actually tell from a woman’s voice when she is having her period, a new study has claimed.
For the study, conducted by Nathan Pipitone at Adams State College and Gordon Gallup from SUNY-Albany, the researchers asked three groups of men to listen to voice recordings of ten women who counted from one to five at four different points over their menstrual cycle.
According to Popular Science, all four recordings were played in a random order and then the first group of men were asked to guess which were made while the women were on their period. The tests revealed that the men were correct 35 per cent of the time, which was described as a ‘significant’ result.
That’s right, ladies! Men can tell whether or not you’re are on the rag – a third of the time!
I myself have developed a technique that can bring this success rate to well over 50 percent – just by listening to women talk!
All you have to do is to pay attention to subtle audio clues, like her saying:
“I just started my period.”
“My period came early this month.”
“Crap. I’ve got awful craps – because of my period.”
“Aunt Flo is paying her monthly visit.” (Note: this works only if she does not actually have an Aunt Flo.)
“It’s shark week! “ (Note: This works only if it is not actually Shark Week on the Discovery Channel.)
“It’s that time of month again. The time when I use tampons, in my vagina.”
“I have reached that point in my menstrual cycle during which blood leaks from my hoo-ha.”
So what does all this mean? According to Christian J at What Men Are Saying About Women, it means the jig is up, feminists! In a post titled How Men can Decode “Women’s” Menstrual Cycle.. , he writes:
This information is what feminist have been trying to hide, delete and deny for many a decade. They are of the opinion that the menstrual cycle is irrelevant and superfluous to their cause and one can understand why when one looks at the studies on how women are affected by it.
In the worst case scenarios, their behaviour are effected to such a degree as to make them totally dysfunctional and even bedridden for the period(intended) of the cycle. The other side of the argument is ofcourse that it is swept under the carpet and not discussed or taken seriously..
Just some added benefits from feminism, as they live in ignorant, self induced silence..
You might as well pack it in, ladies and manginas – because men know!
A third of the time.
NOTE: I have no idea why Christian J. put the word “women” in quotes in the title of his blog post. Like his now-legendary two-dot ellipses, this is a mystery that may forever remain unsolved. Or you could ask him, I guess.
EDITED TO ADD: This post has now inspired a completely disingenuous “Yahoo Answers” query from an antifeminist concern troll who seems to be pretending that this post was not DRIPPING IN SARCASM. Add your answers, if you want!
New saying: You can catch more flies with poop than with anything.
Is poop-flinging a particularly effective way of altering perspectives? XD
Fox News seems to think so.
I don’t give a fuck about how “progressive” I look. I give a fuck that she is perpetuating old stereotypes that are fucking harmful to minorities. Of course you can complain about how we do it (tone police?) without caring because it doesn’t effect you.
The problem with Kavette’s statements was that it wasn’t just a matter of poor language choices. It was a problem of content–of associating Mags’ misogyny with her being trans in a way that made an insulting assumption about trans women.
That actually doesn’t fall under “well-intentioned but poorly expressed.” That’s crappy intentions.
Soooooo… we should ignore them when they do? I, for one, hope that if I say something well-intentioned and it ends up hurting people, they will tell me so I don’t do it again.
Yup, me too.
That. If I say something clueless and hurtful about trans people, or any group of people, I damn well hope I get called out on it. My feelings aren’t what’s important in that case.
That actually doesn’t fall under “well-intentioned but poorly expressed.” That’s crappy intentions.
And that doesn’t make her evil, and this isn’t some sort of witch hunt or Maoist purge or wtfever. But it shouldn’t just be allowed to go unquestioned. And if, maybe, things do, in some spaces become dogpiles or high fives or attacks, I don’t think that happened here and now.
Other times, it’s a reaction to a genuine atmosphere of censorship that kills discussion.
What discussion do you believe is valuable here that’s been killed by asking Kavette to stop making transphobic assumptions about trans women?
If the answer is “a discussion about WHY it’s wrong/incorrect/misguided/etc” or something like that, that’s already been had and rejected. So even a “but then she’ll never learrnnn” argument isn’t valid here. We’ve already explained over and over what the issue is. The discussion of the discussion has been done. xD
So what’s the valuable discussion you believe was killed by an “atmosphere of censorship”?
@Zhinxy nobody called Kavette a terrible person, or a horrible feminist or even a bad friend/ally. I didn’t say “YOU AND KAVE ARE NOT MY FRIENDS ANYMORE BECAUSE YOU ARE TRANSPHOBIC ASSHOLES”. I just asked her to stop making assumptions about queer people. So did everybody else xD Why are we talking about intentions? Nobody went into what her evil intentions must have been…
[quote]Yeah, often it is. Sometimes when people whine about ‘PC gone mad’ they’re whining that marginalized people are getting offended when they insult them.
Other times, it’s a reaction to a genuine atmosphere of censorship that kills discussion. Makes you not want to bother even entering a discussion if you don’t toe the party line because you will be descended upon by the self-righteous.[/quote]
So goes the claim, but every time it’s more like what I said than what you said. Funny how you’re insisting that now, when someone starts with something ridiculously transphobic and insists on standing by it, we’ve gone too far.
Fuck off.
[quote]I’m not just talking about the full-on jerks here. Just well-meaning people who may be blind to their own privilege who get shouted the fuck down before they’ve started. Who may have otherwise been willing to stick around and learn.[/quote]
I totally believe in the sincerity of anyone who claims the only thing stopping them from being good allies was being told they were being assholes with an -ism problem.
Anyone who fucking thinks an oppressed group owes them being nice when they do something oppressive is being a fucking asshole.
*Oppressor punches oppressed in the face*
Oppressed: “Hey, you punched me in the face. That hurts me. Stop doing that please.”
Oppressor” “I didn’t intend to hurt you when I punched you in the face. Anyways, you sort of deserved it, why can’t I punch you in the face? Asking me not to punch you in the face makes me feel bad, and it makes me like you less.”
Oppressed: “Seriously, it hurts, stop fucking doing it.”
Oppressor: “Why are you so mean to me? Why are you swearing at me? You and everyone like you is so nasty! I’m leaving!” *storms off in a huff*
I just asked her to stop making assumptions about queer people. So did everybody else xD Why are we talking about intentions? Nobody went into what her evil intentions must have been…
Exactly. It seems like how this conversation often goes down is that the person who has been asked to examine/change hir BEHAVIOR ends up changing the conversation to intentions. But it’s not really about intentions at all.
It’s not impossible for political correctness to go to far. It does happen and it annoys me a lot because it draws attention away from the real issues and makes all legitimate attempts to solve racist/sexist/other-ist problem look bad.
Recently, Obama was holding an online discussion and one woman asked him to “do a jig” for her. Obviously, the woman annoyed me for wasting the President’s time with something so stupid, but all Gawker commenters could say was, “Oh my god, she said ‘jig”! Like ‘jigaboo!'” No, a jig is a word that means a dance. Stop it.
Agh, “too far”*
I hope that wasn’t your ace in the hole, because that looks more like focusing on the wrong racist stereotype in the equation.
@Crumbelievable
Agree with Rutee. Assuming that this woman is white, there definitely are racist overtones to it.
Besides, The word “jig” IS used as a slur. Nixon was fond of it. It is not unrelated to the dance.
Or at least, jigs and reels were the common dances of minstrel shows. This isn’t over sensitive people just going crazy over a coincidental resemblance to “jigaboo”.
http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/55/messages/720.html
…ragtime piano was called ‘jig piano’ (in St. Louis) and the syncopating bands, like (Scott) Joplin’s, were called ‘jig bands.’ This term, taken from jig dances, even came a little later to be a designation for the Negro himself…”
So… Yeah…” a jig is a word that means a dance.”
A dance with a history, and one that you might want to look into a little deeper before you’re sure everybody is overreacting.
@zhinxy: Huh. I’ve mostly heard “jig” used to refer to traditional Scottish dancing, so thanks for the ticket to clue town. I mean, I wasn’t planning on asking the president to do a little jig or anything, but it’s good to know why saying “jig” was inappropriate, not just kinda weird.
Can you imagine anyone asking a white president to dance at all? Let alone a fucking jig?
I can fully understand the unfortunate implications but is it possible at all that she was using jig to refer to a dance? No? That is an alternate meaning, is it not?
This is exactly what I was talking about with how political correctness bothers me sometimes. You can agree with people on a million instances of “Yeah, what that person said was definitely really racist/sexist/homophobic” but you disagree on one example and suddenly everyone turns on you for not agreeing. Either you see something as racist or you don’t and that means you’re ignorant and racist for not seeing it.There’s no winning.
Whatever.
Either you see something as racist or you don’t and that means you’re ignorant and racist for not seeing it.
Nobody said this about you though.
I am serious in my question, too. Would anyone be asking a white president to dance any dance on demand?
In the robotocracy, there be a list of all political correct things that have to be said or unsaid. This make things smoother.